Dont Be Evil  
 Don't Be Evil - restoring the public trust in business, politics and the media   
 
    
« Home

Email Contact

comments at dontbeevil dot com

Posts

Don't be hypocritical
What lies in our power not to do
Is 'censorship' the solution?
Google virtual protest
Helping Google reclaim its soul
Burning digital books
Eric Schmidt's logical fallacy
Choice vs. lock-in
Resistance isn't futile
Sickening collaboration
 
     Archives
04/25/04 05/02/04 05/09/04 05/16/04 05/23/04 05/30/04 06/13/04 07/04/04 07/11/04 08/08/04 11/07/04 12/05/04 04/17/05 04/24/05 05/01/05 05/08/05 05/15/05 06/12/05 06/26/05 07/10/05 07/17/05 07/24/05 07/31/05 08/07/05 08/28/05 09/18/05 09/25/05 10/09/05 11/13/05 12/04/05 01/15/06 01/22/06 01/29/06 02/05/06 02/12/06 03/12/06 04/02/06 04/09/06 04/16/06 04/23/06 04/30/06 05/07/06 05/14/06 05/21/06 06/04/06
 
     Links
Poynter Google's Ten Things Conflict of Interest


Not just morally repugnant - 5/03/2006 12:02:00 AM

Tomorrow's Wall Street Journal has a good opinion piece on Google's censorship problem (subscription required).

Looks like I'm not the only one who will use Google's shareholder meeting on May 11 to protest the fact that Google, the company that wants to "organize the world's information," has compromised its principles and built a sophisticated censorship system. Amnesty International plans a media campaign to coincide with the shareholder meeting to raise awareness of this issue.

It's not just about being a "do-gooder," but Google's censorship could hurt its brand, and its stock price:
Shareholders should take heed, and not just because it's morally repugnant to collaborate with repression. In the short term, it's obviously good business to be in China, but there are longer-term consequences that should be considered.
Tech companies say they have no choice ...
American tech companies say they are simply complying with the laws of the land to avoid getting kicked out.
... but that's an illogical argument and a rationalization.
But they could resist more forcefully, as they do when protesting China's failure to protect intellectual property. They are willing to cave on human rights for a simple and understandable reason: They feel they can't afford not to be in China.
Should Google get credit for "agonizing" over their decision, when they ultimately caved?
Google says it agonized over launching a censored, local search engine early this year. But the company decided that offering is better than its older offshore service, which was slower than services of Chinese competitors and vulnerable to wholesale government shutdowns.
For Google, this issue is bigger than China. Google has destroyed user trust and tarnished the Google brand.
There also is the risk to tech companies' reputations. Yahoo and Google have faced a PR backlash, including an unflattering congressional hearing that has helped take the shine off of Google's "Don't Be Evil" motto. There's a reason companies respond to political pressure on human-rights issues, as many did during the Apartheid era in South Africa: To protect their most important bottom-line asset -- their brand.
As Google demonstrated when it stood up to the US DoJ, resistance isn't futile.

10:33 AM

best nees
http://www.photographs.net.in/    

10:42 AM

best nees
http://www.mentalhealth.net.in/    

10:48 AM

best nees
http://www.tutorials.net.in/    

Post a Comment

 dontbeevil.com